Postoperative Outcomes in Obstructive Sleep Apnea Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Comparative Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common comorbidity in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and may predispose patients to postoperative complications. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to determine the evidence of postoperative complications associated with OSA patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: A literature search of Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, Medline In-process, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL until October 2016 was performed. The search was constrained to studies in adult cardiac surgical patients with diagnosed or suspected OSA. All included studies must report at least 1 postoperative complication. The primary outcome is major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) up to 30 days after surgery, which includes death from all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, myocardial injury, nonfatal cardiac arrest, revascularization process, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, newly documented postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF), stroke, and congestive heart failure. Secondary outcome is newly documented POAF. The other exploratory outcomes include the following: (1) postoperative tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation; (2) infection and/or sepsis; (3) unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission; and (4) duration of stay in hospital and ICU. Meta-analysis and meta- regression were conducted using Cochrane Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane, London, UK) and OpenBUGS v3.0, respectively. RESULTS: Eleven comparative studies were included (n = 1801 patients; OSA versus non-OSA: 688 vs 1113, respectively). MACCEs were 33.3% higher odds in OSA versus non-OSA patients (OSA versus non-OSA: 31% vs 10.6%; odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-4.2; P = .002). The odds of newly documented POAF (OSA versus non-OSA: 31% vs 21%; OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.13-3.33; P = .02) was higher in OSA compared to non-OSA. Even though the postoperative tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation (OSA versus non-OSA: 13% vs 5.4%; OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.03-6.89; P = .04) were significantly higher in OSA patients, the length of ICU stay and hospital stay were not significantly prolonged in patients with OSA compared to non-OSA. The majority of OSA patients were not treated with continuous positive airway pressure therapy. Meta-regression and sensitivity analysis of the subgroups did not impact the OR of postoperative complications for OSA versus non-OSA groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis demonstrates that after cardiac surgery, MACCEs and newly documented POAF were 33.3% and 18.1% higher odds in OSA versus non-OSA patients, respectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.039 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".